The Cyprus
problem remaining unresolved seems in the first instance to be an obstacle to
Turkey’s negotiations with the EU for accession.

Actually the
facts and realities in the island are rather different from the way they are
seen from Europe.

The “bi-zonal,
bi-communal federation based on the political equality of the Greek and Turkish
people, formed by Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot constituent states of equal
status” framework set by the United Nations during the late seventies, aiming to
achieve a sustainable and a comprehensive settlement to the Cyprus problem,
actually does not, any more, reflect the realities of the island.

A large
segment of the Greek Cypriot people have little affection for their Turkish
Cypriot compatriots, many psychologically unprepared to even hear them mentioned
let alone treat them as equals. This of course complicates an already complex
situation.

The lack of
respect and empathy between the two communities was such in the 1960s that
inter-communal violence, initiated by the Greek Cypriots , erupted and
culminated with massacres taking place throughout the island, forcing the United
Nations to send in peacekeepers in March 4, 1964.

Preface

Contrary to
the widely believed, misleading information that the island was divided after
the Turkish intervention in 1974 the truth is that the island was divided in
1958.

April 1st 1955 saw the foundation of EOKA, which was not actually
seeking independence as it claimed. If that had been the case the Turkish
Cypriots on the island and Turkey would have accepted this. EOKAs goal was
“Enosis”, union with Greece, even though the Greek mainland is 800 km away to
the west, however the Turkish coast is only 75 km away north bounds.

Neither the Turkish Cypriots nor Ankara accepted Enosis and eventually the
island, after inter-communal clashes, divided initially in 1958. The division
was ossified during the December 1963 events and the “Green Line” was drawn by
Colonel Peter, the then commander of the British troops in the island, with a
green pencil on the map. After the severe inter-communal clashes, the UN troops
finally set foot on the island in May 1964, after UN Security Council Resolution
No. 186 was taken out on March 4th, 1964.

The division between the two people of the island was also distinctive in
the social life. No intermarriages took place for centuries and still the same.

The Turkish Cypriots lost thousands of their kinsmen and women, they also
lost their hopes, their future, their past and lived under inhuman conditions
with no food, no water, no home, no electricity, no money, no jobs and no hope
for the future, under the genocide exerted by the then Makarios Government
during the dark ages, which lasted from 1963 to 1974.

The island was
invaded by the Greek army of Greece from 1964 to 1967 and severe clashed took
place between Greek Cypriots backed with troops from Greece and Turkish
Cypriots. Finally The Security Council, at a meeting on 22 December 1967,
adopted resolution 244 (1967) calling Greek national troops to be withdrawn from
Cyprus. This
withdrawal never fulfilled completely and the consequences of it was the July
15, 1974 Coupe de Eta against Makarios by the Greek soldiers and officers still
remaining in the island.

The Main Issue

There is no
instrument to motivate the Greek-Cypriots on the negotiation table. At this
crucial stage, the mission that should be fulfilled by the EU has never been
understood by the member countries or the Union itself. This ineffectiveness
forced the negotiations for a comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem,
which ended up unsuccessful and played a significant role in the victory of Mr.
Eroglu.

But even
today, a forward step towards the lifting of the embargoes and to fulfill the post-2004 promises of the EU and
others, on “Direct Trade” for the Turkish Cypriots would be quite an important
step towards the solution and may be meaningful and operable. The only way to
break down the existing belief of Turkish Cypriots that the “EU is not earnest
and made a phony promise just to give support to a certain Turkish Cypriot
politician” would be this forward step.

This step would
compel and motivate the Greek Cypriots towards a solution. And if in the long
run, if it causes an increase in the eastern Mediterranean trade due to the
opening of the Turkish air and sea ports to the vessels and planes bearing the
flag of the Cyprus Republic, it may give a significant push to the creation of
confidence between the two peoples of Cyprus. This is one of the very important
points which is desperately needed in Cyprus.

The obverse of
the presidential elections looks quite different. If the result of this election
is analyzed in depth, it can be easily understood that the victory of Mr. Eroglu
will be a constructive factor to a comprehensive and sustainable solution to the
Cyprus problem. Ethnic clashes and the breach of peace actually took place among
the nationalists of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots of the island. To reach a
sustainable and a long lasting comprehensive solution, peace is needed in
between the nationalists of both people. It was merely impossible for Mr. Talat
to accomplish this mission. On the other hand Mr. Eroglu is quite a dependable
character for the Turkish Cypriot nationalists and this distinction will add
leverage to a solution to the Cyprus problem, in the Turkish side.

It will be quite
deceptive to popularize the “Who said No to Annan Plan” matter. Even when
evaluating the case from this popularized understanding, the outcome will
inevitably be “Mr. Christofias voted NO to this plan and now for a solution
alike to Annan Plan, there are ‘two NO voters’ on the negotiation table”.

What EU may do

The AK (Justice
and development Party) Party government of Turkey in power since 2002, is nearly
three steps ahead of Greece and Greek Cypriots. By opening up five check points
for free passage on April 23, 2003, supporting the Annan Plan on April 24, 2004
and encouraging the than president of TRNC, Mr. Talat to work for a compromise
in the ongoing negotiations, initially with Mr. Papadopulos and than Mr.
Christofias. The EU should exert pressure on Greek Cypriots and Greece, who both
seem reluctant since the beginning of the talks in 1968.

Tolessen the
mistrust between the two peoples of Cyprus, the EU should organize an
international conference inviting the two peoples of the island and their
motherlands, all on an equal basis, to initiate a process to settle the
everlasting Cyprus Dispute.

The European
Parliament should follow the lead of the European Commission and start work to
fulfill the EU's April 2004 promise of “Direct Trade” for the Turkish Cypriots.
Passing this regulation may lead to a further constructive step by Turkey to
open its seaports and airports to Cypriot vessels and planes, and the European
Union would then lift the Cyprus-related blocks on eight of Turkey's EU
negotiating chapters. This will end the constrained vicious circle and build
good relations with Turkey.

These precautions
will give a push to the negotiations pushing them towards a sustainable
solution. If the EU cannot exert pressure on the Greek Cypriot side for a
comprehensive solution on the ongoing negotiations, than a significant partition
in the island will be inevitable. Turkey will be faced with a frozen process
with the EU and turn its face towards the East rather than the West , and
EU-NATO relations will never be as they have been before.

Conclusion

Turkish
Cypriots are seeking a “bi-communal bi-zonal federal solution” which ensures
equality and security between both parties. This federal partnership will be
comprised of Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot constituent states of equal
status. It will have a single international personality and in principle, single
citizenship and sovereignty, details of which are to be negotiated at the table.
These commitments are important since it is the first time these have been
underlined and accepted by the leaders of the two Peoples, although these were
never accepted and established among UN parameters before.

Turkey’s
guarantees and the Treaty of Alliance are both the red lines of Turkish Cypriots
and they should continue without any change as it was agreed on Zürich and
London Agreements, 1959. The disturbance of Turkish Cypriots on guarantees goes
back to 1963, where they experienced a harsh genocide exerted by the Greek
Government. This lasted for 11 years and the Turkish Cypriots were finally freed
by the intervention of motherland Turkey in 1974.

The latest poll
titled “2009 Cyprus Barometer” held in the Greek side of the island by Rai
Consultants Public Ltd. on behalf of Marfin Laiki Bank, revealed the fact that
65% of the Greek Cypriots do not wish to live together with the Turkish Cypriots
under a single state, whether it is a Federation or something similar. The same
results come out from the Turkish side more or less in the same percentage as
well.

This means a
“United State” or a “Federal State” composed of Turkish and Greeks Cypriots is
merely a pipe dream, which has no hope of a long life. After couple of years
things will go back to December 21, 1963 when the inter-communal clashes or
rather a “Civil War” was started decades ago.

Question to
audiences

If there is no
promising or a heartwarming solution plan on the negotiation table , where both
peoples of the island would not say “Yes” to cheerfully, like the Annan Plan,
and taking into consideration the 42 years of negotiations with no significant
result, then don’t you think now that it is the time for the great powers of the
world to think of a solution other than the “bi-zonal, bi-communal Federation”
which was agreed upon in the late seventies.